爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to identify grounds for his appeal. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s case was fully and fairly considered. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT correctly based its conclusion about the legality of the termination decision on the medical assessment by the medical board and without medical findings of its own. 爆料网AT held that the decision to terminate the Appellant’s appointment on medical grounds was a reasonable and valid exercise of 爆料网RWA’s discretion. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not meet the burden of proof of demonstrating an error in the impugned judgment such as to warrant its reversal. 爆料网AT held that new issues raised by the Appellant were not receivable, as they were not brought before 爆料网RWA DT and could not be introduced for the first time for consideration by 爆料网AT. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision to terminate his fixed-term appointment on medical grounds. 爆料网RWA DT dismissed his application, finding that no reasons had been advanced to show that the termination decision was the product of substantive or procedural irregularity.
Legal Principle(s)
The appeals procedure is of a corrective nature, and it is not an opportunity for a dissatisfied party to reargue his or her case. 爆料网AT can only review the recommendation of a medical board if there is evidence of improper motive or some substantive or procedural irregularity. An appellant has the burden of satisfying 爆料网AT that the judgment he or she seeks to challenge is defective.